DHS Orders Border Patrol to Run Away from

The usual Obamatons once again come out in support of a bizarre and foolish Obama policy. Have you no shame? No decency? You seriously think it is the duty of law enforcement officers to run away from criminals? Do you have ANY idea how stupid that is?

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

POLICY ? what fucking POLICY ?

have you no intelligence ?

Are they allowed to throw back?

News flash: We have 2000 miles of border and 5-600 miles of fence. I'm not under the illusion that non-continuous chain-link fences deter any criminal from simply walking around them. Concrete and lead will alleviate the problem.


Lol, What do you mean "it attracts curiosity"? There is not a Mexican alive living in that cesspool of a country that does not know how much greater our country is in comparison. They already know why they want and do flee their own country.


The soldier is only doing what he has been trained to do, following the presidents' and his leaders orders, and there would be no need for yelling if they had the orders to defend our country. A soldier is trained to locate a target, determine if it is friendly or a hostile, and eliminate if it is a hostile. There is not much thought required to understand that.
Another news flash: Made in America is alive, well, and spreading like wildfire these days. Don't need Mexicans to take the edge off anymore, and it is shit anyway compared to ours.


I'm not sure how one could insinuate that the atrocities these mexican gangs and cartels commit, are not actual murders and rape? Have you read any news in the past 10 years? Google "cartels chopping heads off" or "MS-13 gang killings", it will assure that you know they are actual murders. Originally Posted by nwarounder

I am unaware of any insinuation regarding murder and rape not being as such. Just that manning a fence, no matter how high, will, in the long run, be no more effective than a Great Wall.

The trend I see is hate, and fear.

nwarounder

the quintessential dumbass that's afraid of his own shadow ..


how far can a man hurl a brick? ... back the fuck up !

in your case, kill the greasy little bastard

I am unaware of any insinuation regarding murder and rape not being as such. Just that manning a fence, no matter how high, will, in the long run, be no more effective than a Great Wall.

The trend I see is hate, and fear. Originally Posted by JohnnyCap

It was your own words...."I'd prefer to spend the money fighting actual murder and rape than putting up a fence".

I do agree though, for those living near the border under constant attack from these ruthless savages and their government that refuses to defend them, they do start hating these people and have to live in constant fear. The difference between you and I is, I blame the mexicans responsible for these acts, not the American victims for feeling this way.

It was your own words...."I'd prefer to spend the money fighting actual murder and rape than putting up a fence".

I do agree though, for those living near the border under constant attack from these ruthless savages and their government that refuses to defend them, they do start hating these people and have to live in constant fear. The difference between you and I is, I blame the mexicans responsible for these acts, not the American victims for feeling this way. Originally Posted by nwarounder

You have done nothing but attempt to speak for me. Building a fence does not deal with actual crime. I suggest rather than spending money on men to stand by a fence, they spend money investigating the actual crimes. You, extended that to mean other crimes, perhaps because you are a hate and fear driven domestic supremacist, I don't know, but I in no way suggested that time and resources should not be spent investigating crimes regardless whether the perps or victims are white, Mexican, or what have you. My only assertion is that a fence doesn't address actual crime.

You have done nothing but attempt to speak for me. Building a fence does not deal with actual crime. I suggest rather than spending money on men to stand by a fence, they spend money investigating the actual crimes. You, extended that to mean other crimes, perhaps because you are a hate and fear driven domestic supremacist, I don't know, but I in no way suggested that time and resources should not be spent investigating crimes regardless whether the perps or victims are white, Mexican, or what have you. My only assertion is that a fence doesn't address actual crime. Originally Posted by JohnnyCap

Okay, so you want to spend taxpayer dollars investigating the criminals after they have killed an American rather than trying to stop it in the first place. Doesn't make any sense to me, but we are all entitled to our opinions.

Just curious, do you want to ban the use of home security systems and personal body guards so the police could have a crime to investigate if a criminal wanted to kill them?

Then you are saying the patrolmen should shoot the kids with rocks. Originally Posted by i'va biggen

Rocks today, guns tomorrow. They have already shown that they don't respect America so KILL IT BEFORE IT GROWS.

Guess those women and girls in Mission Texas should have had some rocks.

Okay, so you want to spend taxpayer dollars investigating the criminals after they have killed an American rather than trying to stop it in the first place. Doesn't make any sense to me, but we are all entitled to our opinions.

Just curious, do you want to ban the use of home security systems and personal body guards so the police could have a crime to investigate if a criminal wanted to kill them? Originally Posted by nwarounder

No more than I want to ridicule and sarcastically over-extend ideas contrary to my own. But I've never wanted to lavishly display the wealth and opulence one has to build a fence around, hire guards and buy a security system for.

You have yet to demonstrate how your fence is preventing any crime. Since the fence and the onslaught of shallow minded jarheads, has the problem gotten better or worse?

The Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate for the immigration bill calculates that adding 3,500 Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents as proposed in the current version of the legislation would exceed $600 million annually – that’s around $171,400 per agent per year. Assuming Border Patrol agents cost about the same as all CBP officers, increasing the number of agents by 20,000, as is proposed in the Corker-Hoeven amendment, would cost over $3.4 billion a year. Over the next decade, this increase would amount to over $34 billion. This yearly cost for additional agents is close to the Border Patrol’s current annual budget and far exceeds the $6 billion the CBO calculated for the 10-year cost of a much smaller staff increase.

How can anyone defend this? This is bizarre. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

We aren't, this is mostly made up shit (the controversy at least).

The usual Obamatons once again come out in support of a bizarre and foolish Obama policy. Have you no shame? No decency? You seriously think it is the duty of law enforcement officers to run away from criminals? Do you have ANY idea how stupid that is? Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Even if this is really an Obama policy (and I don't concede that at all) I didn't see you complain about Reagan ordering the Marines in Lebanon to not load their weapons before they were blown to bits and 241 Marines (and 398 total people) died.

Obama is just being Reaganesque IMHO

No more than I want to ridicule and sarcastically over-extend ideas contrary to my own. But I've never wanted to lavishly display the wealth and opulence one has to build a fence around, hire guards and buy a security system for.

You have yet to demonstrate how your fence is preventing any crime. Since the fence and the onslaught of shallow minded jarheads, has the problem gotten better or worse? Originally Posted by JohnnyCap

Have you even seen our Whitehouse? It has fences, alarm systems and armed guards to keep criminals out. But I guess that's not proof that these measures provide security and defense against criminals? I'll defer to link the millions of articles one could find on their own on the internet.

Have you even seen our Whitehouse? It has fences, alarm systems and armed guards to keep criminals out. But I guess that's not proof that these measures provide security and defense against criminals? I'll defer to link the millions of articles one could find on their own on the internet. Originally Posted by nwarounder

I think you resoundingly proved your case.

Have you even seen our Whitehouse? It has fences, alarm systems and armed guards to keep criminals out. But I guess that's not proof that these measures provide security and defense against criminals? I'll defer to link the millions of articles one could find on their own on the internet. Originally Posted by nwarounder

I think you resoundingly proved your case. Originally Posted by Jewish Lawyer

Whether the JL is being sarcastic or not, I'm satisfied.

nwa wants to liken protecting a landlocked building hundreds of miles from any border to fencing and staffing a 3000 mile long border we share with a substantially weaker enemy. Not the same thing, but even if it was I'd still suggest they're overdoing it at 1600. There's never been anyone there worth that much security.